{"id":50581,"date":"2021-10-04T11:15:23","date_gmt":"2021-10-04T15:15:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/?p=50581"},"modified":"2021-10-12T07:17:55","modified_gmt":"2021-10-12T11:17:55","slug":"history-of-human-sexuality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/history-of-human-sexuality\/","title":{"rendered":"The History of Human Sexuality: The Standard Narrative"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Why do the authors of Sex at Dawn <\/em>say the standard narrative of the history of human sexuality is incorrect? What do the authors claim is the standard narrative? Do other scientists agree?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In their book Sex at Dawn, <\/em>Ryan and Jeth\u00e1 argue against the standard narrative of the history of human sexuality. They begin their argument by laying out the supposed standard narrative in preparation to refute it. However, some scientists claim that what Ryan and Jeth\u00e1 are using is actually the cultural narrative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keep reading for Ryan and Jeth\u00e1’s version of the standard narrative of the history of human sexuality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

The History<\/strong> of Human Sexuality<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Before we dive into the authors\u2019 arguments in the book Sex at Dawn<\/em>, we need to understand the traditional description of evolutionary human sexuality\u2014the \u201cstandard narrative\u201d\u2014that Ryan and Jeth\u00e1 argue against. The standard narrative describes the way men\u2019s and women\u2019s approaches to reproduction evolved over time. (Shortform note: In general, when Ryan and Jeth\u00e1 refer to \u201cmen\u201d and \u201cwomen,\u201d we can infer that they\u2019re specifically referring to cisgender people. Sex at Dawn<\/em> was published in 2010 and does not explicitly mention transgender or intersex people.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the standard narrative, this is the history of human sexuality: If a man and a woman find each other desirable, they\u2019ll form a long-term, monogamous bond (from which they\u2019ll periodically escape for flings with other partners). This pairing offers women the security of access to resources and offers men the all-important certainty that they are their children\u2019s biological father. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

(Shortform note: In Mating in Captivity<\/em><\/a>, couples therapist Esther Perel argues that the nature of monogamy has continued to evolve beyond this narrative in that modern monogamy is less of a practical exchange of resources and more of an expression of love and commitment to a partner<\/a>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to Ryan and Jeth\u00e1, the standard narrative is an example of \u201cFlinstonization,\u201d or the tendency to use modern cultural mores to explain historical human behavior. <\/strong>For example, we frequently hear stories of women \u201csettling\u201d for partners who can provide financial security, even if they\u2019re not a love match. According to the authors, we then mistakenly project the same expectation backward onto prehistoric women because we assume that \u201csettling\u201d must be an innate (rather than culturally-ingrained) behavior. However, prehistoric humans lived in very different social and physical environments than modern humans, so it\u2019s unwise to assume they went through the same thought processes as modern humans in choosing whether or not to commit to a mate. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

(Shortform note: Flinstonization is a form of the \u201cnarrative fallacy.\u201d In Thinking, Fast and Slow<\/em><\/a>, Daniel Kahneman describes the narrative fallacy<\/a> as the human tendency to rearrange facts into consistent stories in order to make sense of the world<\/a>. When scientists Flinstonize the past, they\u2019re essentially rearranging the evidence to fit the current cultural story.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Assumptions of the Standard Narrative<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

According to the authors, the standard narrative relies on a set of basic assumptions, which we\u2019ll explore below. Each of these assumptions is based on the underlying idea that passing on one\u2019s own genes is the ultimate motivation for all human beings. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

(Shortform note: In The Selfish Gene<\/em><\/a>, Richard Dawkins argues that the motivation to reproduce happens at the level of each individual gene<\/em><\/a>, not the whole-organism level. That\u2019s because, if individual organisms (such as humans) were motivated to reproduce their entire genetic codes, they wouldn\u2019t focus on sexual reproduction, which only passes down half<\/em> of their genes. In Dawkins\u2019 view, the fact that humans are so focused on sexual<\/em> reproduction disproves the idea that our objective is genetic<\/em> reproduction.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Assumption 1: Monogamy Is \u201cNatural.\u201d <\/h4>\n\n\n\n

According to the standard narrative, monogamy is the natural result of men\u2019s and women\u2019s differing reproductive imperatives. This logic requires its own set of contributing assumptions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n